DCT
2:16-cv-03040
COLT Intl Clothing Inc v. Quasar Science LLC
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Colt International Clothing, Inc. dba COLT LED (California)
- Defendant: Quasar Science, LLC (California); Cinelease, Inc. (Nevada)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Cislo & Thomas LLP
- Case Identification: 2:16-cv-03040, C.D. Cal., 05/03/2016
- Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the Central District of California because Defendant Quasar Science resides in the district, and both Defendants have regular and established places of business and allegedly committed acts of infringement within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ light harnesses infringe a patent related to a flexible and adaptable system for mounting and powering multiple elongate lights.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns modular lighting systems, primarily used in the photography and filmmaking industries to create large, customizable arrays of lights that are easy to assemble and disassemble.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges Plaintiff provided written notice of the patent-in-suit and its infringement to Defendant Quasar on January 19, 2016, and to Defendant Cinelease on January 20, 2016, demanding they cease infringing activity. The patent itself contains a certificate of correction dated May 3, 2016, correcting a typographical error in claim 1.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2014-02-04 | Priority Date for U.S. Patent No. 9,239,134 |
| 2016-01-19 | U.S. Patent No. 9,239,134 Issues |
| 2016-01-19 | Notice of infringement sent to Quasar Science |
| 2016-01-20 | Notice of infringement sent to Cinelease |
| 2016-02-04 | Plaintiff obtains sample of accused product |
| 2016-05-03 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 9,239,134 - "Flexible and Adaptable Light Harness and Wiring"
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 9,239,134, "Flexible and Adaptable Light Harness and Wiring", issued January 19, 2016.
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent describes conventional methods for setting up arrays of lights, such as for film production, as time-consuming and inflexible. These methods often involved custom-building mounting surfaces like plywood boards and assembling custom-length wiring, which would later be disassembled or discarded ('134 Patent, col. 1:26-42).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is a pre-fabricated, flexible light harness that simplifies this process. It consists of two parallel flexible elongate members (e.g., straps) that have multiple "receiving sections" (e.g., elastic loops) to hold the ends of elongate lights, such as LED bars. A primary power cable is attached along one of the members, with multiple "power branches" pre-positioned to connect to each light, eliminating the need for custom wiring (’134 Patent, col. 2:10-26, Fig. 1).
- Technical Importance: This approach provides a quick, economical, and reusable system for creating customizable light arrays without requiring extensive custom carpentry or electrical work (’134 Patent, col. 2:48-54).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 1 and dependent claim 2 (’134 Patent, col. 4:41-62; Compl. ¶¶ 18, 24).
- Independent Claim 1:
- A light harness for holding a plurality of elongate lights, comprising:
- a first flexible elongate member;
- a second flexible elongate member;
- a primary power cable attached to the first flexible elongate member;
- a first receiving section that is attached to the first flexible elongate member and is formed with a first opening for elastically receiving a first end of an elongate light;
- a second receiving section that is attached to the second flexible elongate member and is formed with a second opening for elastically receiving a second end of the elongate light; and
- a first power branch that extends from the primary power cable and is of sufficient length to connect the primary power cable to the elongate light.
- The complaint notes it does not waive its right to assert infringement of other claims (’134 Patent, Compl. ¶ 25).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The complaint identifies "light harnesses" manufactured, used, offered for sale, and sold by Defendant Quasar Science as the accused products (Compl. ¶ 18).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges the accused products are light harnesses for holding multiple elongate lights, sold to customers in the photography and movie industries (Compl. ¶¶ 11, 18). Plaintiff alleges it obtained a sample of the accused product and that, based on inspection, the product contains flexible elongate members, receiving sections for lights, and a primary power cable with power branches (Compl. ¶¶ 16, 20-23). The complaint includes a photograph from Exhibit 3 showing the components of the accused product, including flexible members and elastic ties (Compl. ¶¶ 21, 46, Ex. 3). Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant Cinelease resells and/or leases these accused products to customers such as Disney (Compl. ¶¶ 28, 30).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'134 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| a light harness for holding a plurality of elongate lights | The accused product is advertised and sold as a light harness for holding a plurality of elongate lights. | ¶19 | col. 2:48-54 |
| a first flexible elongate member; a second flexible elongate member | The accused product includes at least two flexible elongate members. | ¶20 | col. 2:11-16 |
| a primary power cable attached to the first flexible elongate member | The accused product comes with a primary power cable to be attached to the first flexible elongate member using "several elastic ties." | ¶21 | col. 4:48-49 |
| a first receiving section that is attached to the first flexible elongate member and is formed with a first opening for elastically receiving a first end of an elongate light; a second receiving section that is attached to the second flexible elongate member and is formed with a second opening for elastically receiving a second end of the elongate light | The accused product's flexible members have receiving sections with openings for "elastically receiving the ends of elongate lights." | ¶22 | col. 4:50-55 |
| a first power branch that extends from the primary power cable and is of sufficient length to connect the primary power cable to the elongate light | The accused product's power cable has "a number of power branches" that extend from it to connect a light bulb. | ¶23 | col. 4:56-59 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The complaint alleges the accused product's power cable is "to be attached" to the flexible member via "several elastic ties" (Compl. ¶¶ 21, 46). A central dispute may be whether providing a separate cable and ties for attachment meets the claim limitation "a primary power cable attached to the first flexible elongate member," or if the term requires a more integrated or pre-affixed connection.
- Technical Questions: The complaint alleges infringement of dependent claim 2, which requires the openings on the receiving sections to open along an axis perpendicular to the flexible member's longitudinal axis (Compl. ¶ 24). A photograph from Exhibit 3 shows the openings on the flexible members of the accused product, which the complaint alleges are "generally perpendicular" to the member's axis (Compl. ¶¶ 24, 56; Ex. 3, pp. 7-9). The evidentiary record will need to establish whether the accused product's geometry meets this specific relational limitation.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
- The Term: "attached"
- Context and Importance: The construction of "attached" is critical to the infringement analysis for the limitation "a primary power cable attached to the first flexible elongate member." The complaint alleges infringement where the accused product is sold with a power cable and separate elastic ties for a user to perform the attachment (Compl. ¶¶ 21, 46). Whether this "kit" configuration meets the "attached" limitation will be a core issue. Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction could determine whether selling the components separately constitutes direct infringement of the apparatus claim.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes embodiments where a "cable holder" is used to hold the primary power cable to the strap, and this holder "may be composed of a velcro strap, buckle, or other attaching system that permits insertion or removal of the primary power cable" (’134 Patent, col. 4:1-4). This language may support an interpretation where "attached" includes non-permanent or user-configurable connections.
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim language uses the past participle "attached," which may suggest a state of being rather than a capability of being attached. The patent figures consistently depict the power cable (112) as already affixed to the flexible member (102), without showing separate fasteners (’134 Patent, Figs. 1-3). This could support an interpretation requiring the cable to be pre-attached to the member as sold.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement:
- Inducement: The complaint alleges Defendants induce infringement by providing customers, such as Disney, with all necessary parts and advertising the product fully assembled (Compl. ¶¶ 45, 47). This conduct allegedly encourages customers to assemble and use the product in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶¶ 47-48).
- Contributory Infringement: The complaint alleges Defendants contribute to infringement by selling a package of parts that, when combined, practice the claims (Compl. ¶ 55). It further alleges that this combination of parts has "no substantial non-infringing uses" and that the "only imaginable use" is to practice the claims of the '134 patent (Compl. ¶ 57).
- Willful Infringement: The willfulness allegation is based on Plaintiff having provided Defendants with written notice of the '134 patent and their alleged infringement on January 19 and 20, 2016, prior to the filing of the complaint (Compl. ¶¶ 27, 29). The complaint alleges that Defendants continued their infringing conduct after receiving notice (Compl. ¶ 32).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
The resolution of this case may turn on the following central questions:
A core issue will be one of claim scope and direct infringement: does an apparatus claim reciting a component as "attached" read on an accused product sold as a kit of unassembled parts, where the end-user performs the attachment? The court's construction of "attached" will be dispositive for this question.
A second key issue will be one of indirect infringement liability: if the court finds no direct infringement by the Defendants, the focus will shift to whether Defendants' actions—providing the components and advertising the assembled product—are sufficient to establish inducement or contributory infringement by their customers.
Finally, an evidentiary question will be one of willfulness: assuming infringement is found, the court will examine the Defendants' conduct following the pre-suit notice letters from January 2016 to determine if any ongoing infringement was "willful and deliberate," potentially justifying enhanced damages.